de Baptista Cyntia R J A, Vicente Amanda M, Souza Mariana A, Cardoso Juliana, Ramalho Vanessa M, Mattiello-Sverzut Ana C
Department of Health Science, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, Brazil.
Rehabilitation and Functional Performance Graduate Program, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, Brazil.
Rehabil Res Pract. 2020 Aug 20;2020:4209812. doi: 10.1155/2020/4209812. eCollection 2020.
Research and clinical settings use the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) to measure locomotor capacity with considerable methodological diversity. Comparison between healthy and disabled children is frequent; however, the reproducibility of 10MWT using different methods is unknown.
This study analysed intrasubject, test-retest reliability, and agreement of four methods of 10MWT, exploring the influence of pace, acceleration-deceleration phases, and anthropometric measurements when calculating mean velocity.
This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 typical children, both sexes, aged 6, 8, 10, and 12 ( = 30 for each age). The mean times and velocities of the path (10 m) and middle path (6 m) obtained at a self-selected and fast pace were analysed. Initial assessment and another after seven days recorded three measurements per method (sV6 = self-selected pace and 6 m; sV10 = self-selected pace and 10 m; fV6 = fast pace and 6 m; fV10 = fast pace and 10 m). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), multiple regression, and Snedecor-F test (5% significance level) were used.
The fV10 method had high intrasubject reliability for all tested ages (0.70 < ICC > 0.89); sV10 exhibited high intrasubject reliability for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.70 < ICC > 0.89) and moderate for age 10 (0.50 < ICC < 0.69).Test-retest reliability at sV6 and fV6 did not reach high ICC in any tested ages. The test-retest reliability at sV10 and fV10 was moderate for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.50 < ICC > 0.69) and poor for age 10 (0.25 < ICC > 0.49). There was no agreement between methods: sV6 versus sV10 (mean difference = 0.91 m/s; SEM = 0.036); fV6 versus fV10 (mean difference = 1.70; SEM = 0.046). The fV6 method versus fV10 overestimated the velocity (bias = 1.70 m/s).
For typical children, the method that ensured the highest intrasubject reliability used fast pace and 10 m. Moreover, test-retest reliability increased when adopting 10 m at both self-selected and fast pace. The methods were not equivalent but were related, and those that did not compute the entire pathway overestimated the results.
研究和临床环境中使用10米步行测试(10MWT)来测量运动能力,其方法具有相当大的多样性。健康儿童与残疾儿童之间的比较很常见;然而,使用不同方法进行10MWT的可重复性尚不清楚。
本研究分析了10MWT的四种方法的受试者内、重测信度和一致性,探讨了步速、加速 - 减速阶段以及人体测量学指标在计算平均速度时的影响。
这项横断面研究评估了120名6岁、8岁、10岁和12岁的典型儿童(每个年龄组30名),男女不限。分析了在自选速度和快速行走时,10米路径和中间6米路径的平均时间和速度。初始评估和七天后的另一次评估,每种方法记录三次测量值(sV6 = 自选速度和6米;sV10 = 自选速度和10米;fV6 = 快速速度和6米;fV10 = 快速速度和10米)。使用组内相关系数(ICC)、多元回归和斯内德克 - F检验(显著性水平为5%)。
fV10方法在所有测试年龄组中均具有较高的受试者内信度(0.70 < ICC > 0.89);sV10在6岁、8岁和12岁时表现出较高的受试者内信度(0.70 < ICC > 0.89),在10岁时为中等信度(0.50 < ICC < 0.69)。sV6和fV6的重测信度在任何测试年龄组中均未达到高ICC。sV10和fV10的重测信度在6岁、8岁和12岁时为中等(0.5 < ICC > 0.69),在10岁时较差(0.25 < ICC > 0.49)。各方法之间不一致:sV6与sV10(平均差异 = 0.91米/秒;标准误 = 0.036);fV6与fV10(平均差异 = 1.70;标准误 = 0.046)。fV6方法与fV10相比高估了速度(偏差 = 1.70米/秒)。
对于典型儿童,确保最高受试者内信度的方法是快速速度和10米。此外,在自选速度和快速速度下采用10米时,重测信度会提高。这些方法并不等效但相关,那些未计算整个路径的方法会高估结果。